"I learned all that really matters about the Muslim faith on 9/11," Gentries said in reference to the terrorist attacks on the United States undertaken by 19 of Islam's approximately 1.6 billion practitioners. "What more do I need to know to stigmatize Muslims everywhere as inherently violent radicals?"

"And now they want to build a mosque at Ground Zero," continued Gentries, eliminating any distinction between the 9/11 hijackers and Muslims in general. "No, I won't examine the accuracy of that statement, but yes, I will allow myself to be outraged by it and use it as evidence of these people's universal callousness toward Americans who lost loved ones when the Twin Towers fell."

How about careful study of Koran, Hadith, Sirat Rasul Allah and the history of islam? Anyone who would invest even a little time into studying facts (and not unthinkingly accepting popular opinions) will come to one conclusion - islam is the most inhuman ideology ever created on this planet. What I find more interesting is the fact that people pretend to believe that this not so... For reasons best known to themselves.

Actually, yes I think Islam is worse than Nazism. In their twisted way German socialists at least were trying to create some kind of a "shiny" future. Admittedly for themselves only and all the "wrong" and\or "lesser" races were to be exterminated or enslaved. Plus I have a suspicion that - had they won the War - Germans would have gone liberal within a generation. They would probably still have some veterans to try for war crimes.Islam has been and always will try to drag the world to its ideal of 7th century Arabia. This will never change. It cannot. Unlike Christianity or even Judaism the prophet's word is final and unchangeable. The medieval cruelty we see in Muslim world every day can testify to that.

And I'm not even going to raise to "read the Bible more carefully". If you are not willing to see the difference, there is nothing I can tell you to change your mind. And while there are of course some sects that still follow that "old religion" they are few and far apart and they tend not to blow people up by hundreds.

Muslims tend not to blow up people by the hundreds -- certainly no more so than Christians have. Your apparent determination to see the actions of a few as representative of all speaks volumes about your prejudices.

And I note that you're now talking about how actual followers of the religion behave, even though you started out saying it was about ideology, not people. Maybe you need to get your argument straight.

Look at that website I linked to, and see what the Bible, especially the Old Testament, supports. Medieval cruelty galore. This is the ideology of Islam, but also of Judaism and Christianity. If the Western world is any less steeped in cruelty and barbarism than any other place or time, it's because of secularism; because people have been willing to stand up for what was right regardless of what some book told them God said. That's why we suffer witches to live, and consider freedom to be a good thing and genocide to be bad, and believe in equality.

That's all I have to say on this; if you won't listen there's no point.

And I note that you're now talking about how actual followers of the religion behave, even though you started out saying it was about ideology, not people.

Its possible that - English not being my mother tongue - I somehow used an awkward or incorrect phrase but I think its pretty clear what I meant: people indoctrinated into a certain ideology represent it when they behave according to it's standards and goals.

And without getting into old "we were primitive once too" argument I just want to say that the main difference between Judeo-Christian and Muslim civilizations is our ability to change and progress. As Neal Stephenson put it: "While people are not genetically different, they are culturally as different as they could possibly be, and that some cultures are simply better than others".

"Muslims tend not to blow up people by the hundreds -- certainly no more so than Christians have".

Argh, I refuse to be sucked into this. This is positively the last time I'm posting on this subject...

I don't even know how to respond to that.

Yes, a few Muslims blew up hundreds of people on 9/11. You, however, refer to other religions/sects not "tending" to blow up hundreds of people, as if it was a general Muslim tendency. How many Muslims have you met? Because I've met a lot, and they seemed no more likely to blow anyone up than the Christians I've met; less so than some Christians.

If you don't know how to respond, try looking at the difference between the actions of a few, and the "tendencies" of an entire religion. Try looking at cases where Christians have been responsible for massive numbers of deaths -- Hiroshima and Nagasaki spring to mind (not that those were specifically about religion, but I never said they were) and of course most Nazis were (at least nominally) Christians too. And sure, the people responsible thought their actions were justified. In every case.

We could go with Northern Ireland instead, or Israel, or Kashmire. That's the other big three. Toss in Saddam Hussein for the agnostics. There's always the Iraq War, started by a Christian with religious rhetoric and called "a just war" by the Catholic Church, or the nuclear bombs deployed against innocent civilians. In America, we've got the Oklahoma City, Waco, 16th Street Baptist Church bombing, Los Angeles Times bombing and more stretching further back.

Its possible that - English not being my mother tongue - I somehow used an awkward or incorrect phrase but I think its pretty clear what I meant: people indoctrinated into a certain ideology represent it when they behave according to it's standards and goals.

So which Muslims represent Islam? The dozen or so behind 9/11? Or Muhammad Yunus? And who gets to say? If you, a (presumably) non-Muslim, get to decide what Muslims "represent it", can others who are not believers in your "ideology" decide who does and doesn't represent it?

I don't even know how to respond to that.

I can understand why you wouldn't know how to respond, but since I think you missed the point being made, I'll put it out there for you. You're trying to convert a universal affirmative: all the terrorists behind 9/11 were Muslims; therefore, all Muslims are terrorists. This logical fallacy fails spectacularly wherever it is used; however, when it is used as the basis for profiling (in this case, deciding who is a terrorist), it fails in a particularly harmful way. In the United States, we've seen this happen all too often in our history: some genius says, "You know, 60% (or however much) of all violent crime is committed by African-Americans (or whoever)". Even if the original statement is true (it usually isn't), the reverse is not -- and if you go about rousting all the African-Americans you see, in the belief that you will be lowering your violent crime rate by 60%, you will find that the large majority of the people you harass are peaceful, law-abiding citizens, and that placing them under suspicion because of their membership in an arbitrary group does no good and much harm.

No, not all the Muslims are terrorists. Most of the Muslims do not kill unbelievers in the name of Allah just as not all the Christians are saints turning the other cheek. However Muslims are obligated to follow their prophet's word and example and... Well, you should really dedicate some time to reading Sirat Rasul Allah.

This argument is pointless but there is one point I need to make. There is a tendency in the West to dismiss religion as something useless and even harmless. A thing of the past. I think it has something to do with Christianity's ability to adopt to changes and new times. However it does not necessarily work with eastern religions. Even in Judaism there are many little rites and traditions that do not always make sense and seem to have no practical purpose. But in fact they do. Their goal is to condition a person to a certain way of thinking. To separate you from "others". Islam has hundreds if not thousands of such rules and rites. All created by one - not very stable - man. People born into Muslim culture - even now - are imprinted with the same mentality as the desert raiders 1400 years ago.Please think about that.

Sorry, I know I said I was done, and I will be after this, but one point I forgot to make: you refer to "medieval cruelty" -- I presume by "medieval" you mean "characteristic of the European middle ages". Which was, of course, a time and place when Christianity was the unquestioned king...

Wow. And that was just plain racist, I suspect. Its like saying that the only reason to dislike president Obama's politics is because he is black.

But you are actually right. It is in my profile. Because I was born and raised in the Soviet Union and can spot a tyranny when I see it. And the fact that I am Israeli just means I cannot dismiss and ignore this issue as many prefer to do. It took me several years of careful studies to arrive to this conclusion and I challenge it continuously because doubt is the most important part of a free mind.So please do not insult my intelligence.

If you're right that the Koran is filled with vile evil blood lust, is the most evil path ever concocted by the mind of man as the mind of god, then why are so many people outraged by certain events and behaviors that have been perpetrated by your government, that have been executed in the name of religion as well? Are we all racist then? Well, that was a silly question. You already called me racist because I disagree with your world theological view.

While it would be a hypocrisy to state that Israel is a fully secular state our government's decisions are not based on the Torah or I'd definitely would not be living here. And if we are talking about ideologies I think that Israel's main problem is the fact that it was created by the Reds.

So you're cram-packed with facts, are you? That would sort of fly in the face of "I learned all that really matters about the Muslim faith on 9/11", wouldn't it? Did you bother to read the article? Evidently not.